“This city has so many panhandlers. It’s clear when a women on the corner of Park and Salisbury Street is driving away in her car and they’re getting dropped off in vans. There’s something wrong here.”

From my reading of the ordinance — and I am NOT a lawyer — it seemed that panhandling in the road was not allowed, but there was no discussion of panhandling AT a roadway. The handouts both seem to indicate that panhandling AT a roadway is now not allowed.

From the wording of the DPW handout, it seems that a resident might think that “offering money” at an intersection, median, or rotary is prohibited. It is not.

The DPW handout instructs residents to call the police — not the panhandling outreach program.

And — of course — the handout reiterates that we’re not restricting people’s rights to free speech, and that it doesn’t target one group or one activity.

I’m not sure how this is different from the billboard solution, and I’m not sure why we think signholders will trust the outreach worker when the public is being told to call the cops when they see someone asking for help.

The plan had a lot of objectives, but it’s unclear whether any of them have been accomplished (except for closing the PIP and establishing a triage center).

Objective 2.2 was “Increase Educational Efforts to Develop an Early Warning System to Target those At risk of Homelessness.” What is more of an early warning than someone begging on a streetcorner?

Objective 4.1 was to have a 0.5 FTE position to coordinate programs for the homeless That definitely didn’t happen. Ditto Objective 4.2, which was to have a commission on homelessness (with 0.5 FTE, paid, from the city side, to support that).

Jordan Levy was supposed to hit up the colleges for developing housing for the homeless (Objective 5.2) and have businesses provide job opportunities (Objective 3.3.1).

There’s a lot of good stuff in here. It’s probably not a perfect plan, but it did require people doing something besides just asking for a report from the city manager when someone on the street asks them for money.

It does not matter what “side” you are on.

We can do better than this.

But it requires that we ask for real solutions and that we demand real conversations.

Brochures are not the solution for a short attention span on the part of our elected officials.

Then:If someone is passively panhandling, and should be referred for services, call First Call for HelpNow: If someone is passively panhandling, and should be referred for services, call DPW Customer Service

Then:Nothing comes between us and our tag daysNow:Nothing comes between us and our tag days

Then: “Several local social service agencies … are collaborating on an interagency service response plan to support the solution via outreach to the individuals who panhandle.”Now: SMOC will provide an “outreach worker [who] will comb city streets, sidewalks, parks, bridges, etc. during both business and non-business hours to assist individuals engaged in panhandling who my be in need of services.” In addition, “the outreach worker will work collaboratively with the Worcester Police in cases where panhandling interferes with public safety or any other potential criminal activity is identified. … The Worcester Police will dedicate a liaison to work with the outreach worker as needed.”

[Aside: when the panhandlers find out that the outreach worker’s primary city contact is the WPD, and that the outreach worker would work hand-in-hand with the WPD, I wonder what reason they will have to trust the outreach worker.]

Then:A public education campaign to discourage residents from giving money to panhandlers and to encourage them to give to social service agencies. This included a one-page flyer in excise tax bills, followed by “print and broadcast media coverage, billboards, posters, street sign postings, … and bus placard advertisements.Now: A public education campaign to discourage residents from giving money to panhandlers and to encourage them to give to social service agencies. “This multi-faceted campaign would include radio, print, broadcast, web-based, social media, signage, billboards, buses, informational sessions, and more.”

Reminder: The current plan to end panhandling — which should not be confused with the previous plan to end panhandling — will be discussed at this Tuesday’s City Council meeting. The meeting will be at 6:00pm in the Esther Howland Chamber at City Hall. If you care about this, you need to email your City Councilors or show up at the meeting.

I will be writing more about this in the coming days (and weeks and months). But you need to do your part and let the Council know how you feel about a recycled plan that didn’t work seven years ago.